D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)

[TheSword]

I don't want to play in a game where the optimal strategy for clerics is pumping speed and running in a circle around the enemies to tag them all with spirit guardians.

Then don’t play the game that way. And don’t play the game with people who play the game that way. And ideally set your expectations up front so as not to disappoint.

Just like I don’t play the game with people who use Leomunds hut or a domed Wall of Force as a battle turret.

Folks are acting like they’re being forced to exploit the game. When did personal responsibility stop being a thing?

And if that isn’t an option because you really like/are married to the player doing this stuff then the DM steps in and just says no. “Sorry the act of taking a persons weight enough to move them in a grapple means they don’t take the damage from the unusual interaction with spike stones”. Or “sorry the act of taking a persons weight to drag them throw the spike stones means you can’t avoid the spikes yourself”. So you still want to proceed.

Who’s actual game in actual play is this destroying? I get that there’s a whole internet cottage industry of influencers trying to make a name for themselves by posting videos coming up with all this guff, and there’s some fun to be had in the theoretical element of that sure. But let’s not pretend this stuff happens without the DM taking a laissez-faire attitude.

 

[CellarHeroes]

I don't want to play in a game where the optimal strategy for clerics is pumping speed and running in a circle around the enemies to tag them all with spirit guardians.

I wouldn't want to play in a game where there is an optimal strategy.

This is why I stopped playing M:tG. Out of all the cards available in a "modern" set, there seemed to be only 3 or 4 viable decks. It became next to impossible to find a group to play for fun.

 

[Epic Meepo]

My homebrew rule will be that Spike Growth damage is only triggered by creatures using their movement speed (similar to the wording for Attacks of Opportunity).

Isn't that how the rules already work? I've heard rumors that the 2024 PHB makes a distinction between moving (which you do voluntarily) and being transported (which happens when someone else repositions you). If that's true, it sounds like dragging someone through Spike Stones just "transports" them through the area. At no point are they "moving" through Spike Stones.

 

[mamba]

Free of exploits? Well you’re asking to be disappointed.

Free of exploits that are not some weird interpretation of the rule but follow the RAW as laid out by the rule, yes. I get it, you have a lot of moving pieces and might miss some, but it absolutely should be the goal.

Some of the ones we are discussing here are 1) not that hard to find, I mean Kibbles did it in maybe a week, I see no reason why WotC cannot get it done in several years, and 2) were pointed out during the playtest already, so there is no excuse

Millions of people are going to happily play the game without needing to stress about the confluence of a rule

sure, I never said the game is awful because of this, just that the affected rules are bad rather than 'good enough'. That every table can fix many of those for themselves is not much of an excuse though

 

[TheSword]

Free of exploits that are not some weird interpretation of the rule but follow the RAW as laid out by the rule, yes. I get it, you have a lot of moving pieces and might miss some, but it absolutely should be the goal.

Some of the ones we are discussing here are 1) not that hard to find, I mean Kibbles did it in maybe a week, I see no reason why WotC cannot get it done in several years, and 2) were pointed out during the playtest already, so there is no excuse


sure, I never said the game is awful because of this, just that the affected rules are bad rather than 'good enough'. That every table can fix many of those for themselves is not much of an excuse though

I think most people 80% will never even realise there is a problem. They will never imagine that if they carry four different weapons they can drop them on the ground each time and draw a new one. Or never even imagine that they could repeatedly drag someone through spike stones.

18% might know it’s a thing but would roll their eyes and think it’s sounds silly/immersion breaking to do it, so wouldn’t bother.

2% might know it’s a thing and think they’ve solved the DMs campaign/found a win button. So in those cases and only those cases, the DM needs to expend a little bit of brain power and say no. Now it’s been mentioned that DMs shouldn’t have to do that, and I get that point. But let’s be honest if a DM is running for a 2% player then they’re probably having to do this already for all the existing abuses.

We shouldn’t be letting a single rare spell interaction determine basic rules for the game. “Hard cases make bad laws”.

I also think we have a few self inflicted wounds here because of the internet. Influencers have to come up with the gotcha elements to get interest and clicks and are encouraged to build them up to be as momentous as possible to attract attention. That creates a bandwagon that exaggerates the importance of these things. That drives debate and attention which makes it seem like these issues are even more important when in reality they are trivial. Even more trivial because most of the people discussing this are DMs not the players that might try to use them.

 

[mellored]

Some of the ones we are discussing here are 1) not that hard to find, I mean Kibbles did it in maybe a week, I see no reason why WotC cannot get it done in several years,

Reddit did it in 2 week.
Kibbles put the list together.
And most of that stuff isn't an exploit, just things he doesn't like.

I still only count 4 real issues.

• Two weapon fighting with 1 hand: which is not intended and takes some rules lawyering to pull off. It's well balanced id used as intended.
• Stealth: seems like a sentence was omitted.
• Conjure Minor Elemental: should scale at 1d8 instead of 2d8
• Giant Insect: which is just OP.

 

[Oofta]

I likely just missed it, but do we have a new version of spike growth that changes the wording? Because the 2014 version says "When a creature moves into...", not "When a creature enters...". Moving into is different than being moved, especially if we're so focused on following the absolute letter of the rules.

 

[mamba]

"When a creature moves into...", not "When a creature enters...". Moving into is different than being moved,

I hate this distinction, that it exists is insanity to me. I am not here to play word games or parse out if the author has a specific meaning for one word that is entirely different from that of another very similar word. Give me a clear rule instead of having me wonder what is meant by the RAW and if there is a difference because they used a synonym in another place instead of using the same word again.

 

[mamba]

Reddit did it in 2 week.
Kibbles put the list together.

ok, so it took slightly more effort then, still nothing WotC could not do, esp since some of it was pointed out during the playtest already. The issue is more that they did not care about the feedback and did not run everything through the playtest, which otherwise would function as their version of Reddit.

And most of that stuff isn't an exploit, just things he doesn't like.

I still only count 4 real issues.

it's a mixed bag, I agree with that, not sure I agree with four, but would have to go through the updated list again. I still would like things to be clearer where they pretty much very clearly are mistakes, that way I would feel more confident about the other questionable ones at least being intentional, even if I disagree with the intent.

 

[Oofta]

I hate this distinction, that it exists is insanity to me. I am not here to play word games or parse out if the author has a specific meaning for one word that is entirely different from that of another very similar word. Give me a clear rule instead of having me wonder what is meant by the RAW and if there is a difference because they used a synonym in another place instead of using the same word again.

If people are going to exploit the exact wording of the text, it goes both ways.